Take any Starfleet vessel that we've seen and then answer this question: What branch of the US military would most likely be capable of taking command of the vessel [if they hand one], Air Force or Navy?
Air Force has the most aerospace experience, and they are usually shown as the group that has spaceships in Sci-Fi [Stargate for example]. However, the air force uses planes with crews maxing around 20, right?
The Navy has the command structure for large vessels already, and well aerospace isn't completely lost on the Navy either.
The vast difference in technology and that learning curve would be placed on both branches, however I'm really talking about which one would adapt more easily. I'm thinking it's the Navy, I just wanted second opinions.
PS: It's not a covert operation type deal... it would be a well known thing that space-travel existed, so don't use that in your replies.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
This starship would still suddenly be handed over to them by aliens, right? It wouldn't come with the historical ballast of being called a "ship" and having a "captain's ready room", a "bridge", a "bow" etc. in the instructions manual?
In such a case, I'd think finders keepers. The Air Force (US or UN or UE or PLA or whatever) would be the likeliest party to grab the vessel, and they wouldn't give it up. The hierarchy would then adapt: "flying aces" did learn to be humble mortal tailgunners or flying truck drivers, so they could learn to be monkeys turning GNDN pipe valves at the captain's commands. They'd still refuse to be called "sailors", though.
If the ship was built by the Earth military, though, I'd gather a wholly new military organization would be created to operate it, since the ship would have no applications within the traditional "realms" or "elements" of the Air Force, the Navy or the Army. The organization would have a Navy-style hierarchy that stresses sheer manpower more than an Air Force but less than an Army, yet not necessarily any deeper historical connections to the Navy.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Bond, James Bond (Member # 1127) on :
I would think when choosing the crew (not the scientists, just the crewmen) you would pull a large portion of them from submarine service since that is the most like serving on a Trek spacecraft. They could deal with confined spaces and close proximity with others, they know how to deal with the dangers of a fire or hull breach in a dangerous pressurized air environment, and there's a sense of comraderie aboard a submarine that's tighter then many larger ships. This all depends on what type of starship we're talking about though. If it was a Galaxy Class a Club Med towel boy could easily adjust. I'm thinking of the older more crowded ships.
The Navy already knows how to deal with larger vessels and has the facilities to repair them (obviously not starships but that can be remedied).
The Air Force can hide jets and stuff like that at Area 51 or Green River in Utah but when you get to starship sizes a hiding place isn't going to make a Hell of a lot of difference.
So, I would say the Navy would be best qualified to handle it.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Through the space shuttle era, NASA would pull its astronauts from both the Air Force and Navy pilot branches. Apollo 12, for example, had an all-Navy crew.
Anyway, in the current US military I believe it's the Air Force that has default responsibility over anything related to space / aerospace operations. Hence, why USAF is in charge in "Stargate" (though the series also employs USMC teams).
Mark
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
Astronauts have come from the USMC too - Glenn for example.
Just FYI and not really on-topic.
I'll dodge the question J and while I agree with Timo that nobody would want to share, something with such large implications would likely have to be shared jointly between services eventually.
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
quote:Originally posted by Timo: This starship would still suddenly be handed over to them by aliens, right? It wouldn't come with the historical ballast of being called a "ship" and having a "captain's ready room", a "bridge", a "bow" etc. in the instructions manual?
In such a case, I'd think finders keepers. The Air Force (US or UN or UE or PLA or whatever) would be the likeliest party to grab the vessel, and they wouldn't give it up. The hierarchy would then adapt: "flying aces" did learn to be humble mortal tailgunners or flying truck drivers, so they could learn to be monkeys turning GNDN pipe valves at the captain's commands. They'd still refuse to be called "sailors", though.
If the ship was built by the Earth military, though, I'd gather a wholly new military organization would be created to operate it, since the ship would have no applications within the traditional "realms" or "elements" of the Air Force, the Navy or the Army. The organization would have a Navy-style hierarchy that stresses sheer manpower more than an Air Force but less than an Army, yet not necessarily any deeper historical connections to the Navy.
Timo Saloniemi
Why do i think of Macross when you mention aliens "giving" a ship to us. Depending on which teat you suckle from, it's either a "Supervision Army Gunboat" that crash lands on South Ataru Island -or- It's was Zor's Battle fortress, for you Robowrech slaves of Carl M. (suck your milk and STFU!).
But that doesn't explain why the UN Spacy uses japanesse Air Force ranks... Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Restoration and reconstruction of then-named ASS-1 for use as the main warship of UN Forces
I couldnt read the linked article past this line. Would you name your super spaceship "ASS-1"?
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Going off topic, but was this really ON topic to begin with?
ASS-1 = Alien Space Ship One. When you're the Japanese writers of an animation that's not meant for English-speaking audiences, the last thing on your mind tends to be what your poorly-assembled acronyms translate to in other languages.
I can just see an emergency evac situation now: "Quick! Everyone cram into the ASS!"
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Or the ASScape pods. B)
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
On topic, yes... the reason I asked is that all modern-placed Sci-Fi [Stargate] places such a ship completely under the USAF. However Star Trek is more closely related to the Navy and so is other far-future sci-fi. Why the difference? Is the USAF even prepared for such an eventuality as building a large space-faring vessel for either military or exploration use? Would the USAF even develop their own heirarchy, instead just copy/paste from the USN?
Ad nausem--- It goes to why Trek is navy-like.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
What is the likelihood that we're going to have large Navy-esque ships anytime in the near future?
I think the most likely answer is that the USSC (United States Space Corps, whatever) would be formed from elements of the USAF and the USN. I mean, why the hell not.
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
quote:Originally posted by Malnurtured Snay: What is the likelihood that we're going to have large Navy-esque ships anytime in the near future?
I think the most likely answer is that the USSC (United States Space Corps, whatever) would be formed from elements of the USAF and the USN. I mean, why the hell not.
United Nations Space Corps, you meant. anything dealing with space on a regular basis should be a cooperative arrangment. Any other option...lets to ill to someone...
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
Gee, you guys are trying to draw it out. I'm thinking of an instanteous event, like we capture the alien attack vessel that was just the first wave, the second is coming in a couple months. We'd have to repair the ship and then crew it in a matter of weeks--- obviously it would be a world event and other nations would contribute, however the US would undoubtlied take a leading role. The USAF would be heavily involved on the technological side of the equation, but I'm thinking that the ship itself would have a heavy assignment of Naval officers, more so than any other branch of the service. Why...
It gets down to the fact that the Navy is the only group that goes into action in a large crew arrangement. The Air Force has flight crews of ~20, and well Marine and Army fighting groups [smaller than battallions]... I'm looking for the word, platoons? Are also small groups. To completely man the ship you need a crew of hundreds and only the Navy works in arrangements like that. Air Force, Army, and Marines depend greatly on many small [not special forces small, but small] semi-autonomous groups to get a job done, while the Navy depends upon a large crew to get an objective done.
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
And what in the heck is the UN Space Corp? They'd be most likely to leave an airlock open.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
quote:Originally posted by Pensive's Wetness: United Nations Space Corps, you meant.
Well, the original question did ask what branch of the *US* military, regardless of your personal view on the subject.
B.J.
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
I posted this question in other places, and I figure an update of important points brought up there was a good idea. One person mentioned that it would be the group that developed the technology, they would be the parent of the Space Force. Obviously, the only group working on it is the Air Force--- or maybe even NASA [what is NASA's rank system?].
This reminded me of Babylon 5, they use some Army ranks too. Perhaps when it started out way back when, Earth's Air Forces parented the Space Forces and when the other branches caught up the Naval ranks and system became predominant aboard starships. But that's B5.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
NASA doesn't have a rank system. It's a civilian agency. I mean, you have things like "pilots" and "mission commanders," but these are job descriptions.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
NASA doesn't have a rank system as it's not a military organization. It uses those of the US military. This means that a Colonel can serve alongside a Commander and that the Colonel outranks the Commander.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
In the situation described, I imagine it would be a multi-service crew. Probably NASA astronauts would form the majority of the flight crew, with military in command to actully fight the thing.
I suppose Navy ranks do make most sense for a future Space Force/Fleet/Whatever. They do have ships, after all and the crew arrangement and organisation would seem to be derived from the Navy. Although, I don't see why they couldn't just make up their own ranks, like the air force did.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
But the Air Force derived their ranks from the Army from which it originally branched off.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
I meant virtually all other air forces in the world, which have their own system, usually derived from ours (British). You know, Flight Leiutenant, Group Captain, Airman, Air Marshal, etc, etc.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
Are those actually ranks/rates or rather titles/job descriptions?
Posted by Warped1701 (Member # 40) on :
Those are the actual ranks that the RAF uses. You can check them out here.
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
I figure that with a promising prospect of going to the stars, there would be an independent Space Corps after a short transition phase. But until then I would assume that rather the Air Force takes care of the ships because of their aerospace expertise (however underdeveloped), even though the command structure would be more like in the Navy on Trek ships.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)